ReviewJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Awake craniotomy for brain tumors during pregnancy: An updated scoping review.
Review in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of brain tumors during pregnancy presents a complex clinical challenge, balancing maternal neurological needs with fetal safety. Awake craniotomy (AC) is a potential strategy to maximize tumor resection in eloquent areas while minimizing fetal anesthetic exposure, but the literature remains sparse. The objective of this review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the use of AC for brain tumors during pregnancy. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect databases for studies reporting on AC in pregnant patients. Data on clinical characteristics, anesthetic techniques, and maternal/fetal outcomes were extracted. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case reports. Eleven studies, comprising 11 patients, met the inclusion criteria. All were case reports or a small case series. AC was performed across all trimesters for various tumors, predominantly gliomas. Anesthetic techniques included both "awake throughout" and "asleep-awake-asleep" approaches, with dexmedetomidine and propofol being common agents. All cases reported successful surgical resections with positive fetal outcomes, resulting in the delivery of healthy infants. Short-term maternal neurological outcomes were generally favorable; however, long-term maternal prognosis was variable and dependent on the underlying tumor pathology. A multidisciplinary approach was highlighted as crucial for success. The available evidence, though limited to case reports, suggests that AC is a viable, effective option for carefully selected pregnant patients with brain tumors. However, the high potential for publication bias warrants caution, and larger, prospective studies are needed to establish definitive guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.